I'm going to start by saying this is a really good idea for a post. It's specific, it's clear, and it's something people will be curious about. You're not just saying "here's how we do patient acquisition." You're saying "most agencies get this wrong, here's why, and here's what we do differently." That's great.
But let me take a look at your opener:
"We've all seen the billboards. The ads on every social media platform. The commercials during our favorite shows. Everywhere you turn, it seems like there are patient acquisition campaigns screaming for attention. But here’s the thing — most of them aren’t talking to the right people."
I think this is good! It's direct, it sets up the premise of the post, and it gets the reader curious. But I do have a few tweaks:
1. "Everywhere you turn" is a little vague. It's true that there are a lot of patient acquisition campaigns out there, but this makes it sound like they're literally everywhere. Which would be really annoying. So let's make it clearer: "On every billboard. The ads on every social media platform. The commercials during our favorite shows." 2. I think we should get rid of that last sentence: "But here’s the thing — most of them aren’t talking to the right people." It's a little too on-the-nose, and it breaks the flow of the paragraph. We can just let the next paragraph do the work for us.
How about this instead:
"We've all seen the billboards. The ads on every social media platform. The commercials during our favorite shows. Everywhere you turn, it seems like there are patient acquisition campaigns screaming for attention. But most of them aren't talking to the right people."
Now let me take a look at your body:
"Most agencies focus on cost-per-lead (CPL) as their primary metric. That means they're optimizing for quantity, not quality. They're getting leads, sure, but those leads aren’t necessarily the right people. The ones who actually need what you offer. The ones who are going to become loyal patients."
I think this is good! It sets up the problem and explains why most agencies get it wrong. But there are a few things we could clarify:
1. What exactly do you mean by "quantity, not quality"? This is a little vague. Let's make it clearer: "Quantity means getting as many leads as possible, no matter who they are or what they need. Quality means getting the right people, the ones who actually need what you offer." 2. What exactly do you mean by "the ones who actually need what you offer"? This is a little vague too. Let's make it clearer: "The ones who actually need what you offer are the ones who are going to become loyal patients. The ones who are going to stick around for the long haul."
How about this instead:
"Most agencies focus on cost-per-lead (CPL) as their primary metric. That means they're optimizing for quantity, not quality. They're getting leads, sure, but those leads aren’t necessarily the right people. The ones who actually need what you offer. The ones who are going to become loyal patients. Quantity means getting as many leads as possible, no matter who they are or what they need. Quality means getting the right people, the ones who actually need what you offer."
Now let me take a look at your close:
"
